Real judgements, distilled
Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1094
An older qualification must still satisfy the eligibility rules governing the appointment sought. Here, the certificate's early date did not secure reinstatement, and rejection of eligibility should not be confused with a conclusive finding that the certificate was forged.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1095
A party benefiting from a conditional stay must meet its deposit requirement or face enforcement. The additional ₹15 crore deposit secures the pending dispute; it does not settle the land's final compensation or amount to an immediate payment to the landowners.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1093
An alleged attempt to kill does not become a lesser offence simply because the victim avoided a fatal injury. Restoring this charge means the accusation must be tried; it does not establish that the accused is guilty.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1090
For the assessment in this case, assistance reducing ordinary manufacturing costs was taxable even though the government wanted to encourage industry. The purpose and actual operation of the particular subsidy mattered more than its general development label.
Criminal Appeal · 2026 INSC 1091
Proof that someone caused a serious injury does not by itself prove the additional ingredients of robbery. A court can substitute a lesser offence supported by the evidence; the sentencing reduction here depended on Appa's particular circumstances.
Special Leave Petition (Civil) · 2026 INSC 1092
Someone challenging an election must ensure that the personal-presentation requirement is met and can be proved. Merely entering the court building does not establish compliance, and a filing defect can end the challenge before the election allegations are examined.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1088
An employee who retires on 30 June may be entitled to the increment that falls due on 1 July after completing a year of service. Authorities that delay paying the amounts due must pay interest after the deadline set by the court.
Civil Appeal · 2026 INSC 1089
Recruitment must follow the qualifications stated in the advertisement and the governing Recruitment Rules. A court will not override a merit-based eligibility decision made under those rules merely because the candidate concerned was higher in the written test.
Writ Petition (Criminal) · 2026:DHC:8797
A person who occupied property only because of employment has no independent right to remain once the employment and decree end. Even when a petition fails, courts can make practical arrangements to let a person recover personal belongings.
14543 more judgements for members
You're seeing the newest cases. Log in — it's free — to keep scrolling, search by name or judge, and filter by court or legal area.
Log in to see moreThe complainant, a Scheduled Caste member and co-trustee of a temple trust along with the appellant, alleged that the appellant threatened to kill him, used a caste slur against him, and was involved in a conspiracy in which he was abducted and coerced with threats and violence into agreeing to transfer temple land. An FIR was registered under several IPC sections and provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and the appellant's anticipatory bail application was rejected by both the trial court and the High Court.
The Supreme Court noted that a key legal requirement for the SC/ST Act's insult-related provisions to apply is that the caste-based insult must have been made within "public view," and found that the FIR did not, on its face, allege that the caste slur happened in front of members of the public. It also observed that the appellant's alleged role in the abduction and intimidation was only inferential and would need to be tested at trial, not something the FIR itself established. On this prima facie assessment, the Court allowed the appeal and directed that if the appellant were arrested in connection with the FIR, he be released on anticipatory bail on terms set by the trial court, while making clear it had not expressed any opinion on the case's ultimate merits.
For a caste-based insult to trigger the special (and more stringent) provisions of the SC/ST Act, the FIR itself must show the insult happened in front of the public: a private confrontation, however serious, does not automatically qualify, and unclear or purely inferential allegations of a wider conspiracy are not by themselves enough to defeat an anticipatory bail application.
